multiplexor said:
Actually, this is not necessarily true, and I speak from personal experience. I recently "upgraded" from a DMA66 IDE drive to a SCSI-1W (20MBs) and took a noticable hit in hard drive speed. Everything takes longer as far as read/write/access is concerned, to the point where I'm considering spending a weekend moving the boot partition back to the IDE drive.
And that's to be expected. In fact, an ATA100 drive (all new drives and computer support this, to my knowledge) will likely outperform all but SCSI80 and SCSI160. With an ATA133 drive, only onboard SCSI160 (or a new 64bit/66MHz PCI) will really compete. Then you look and the price difference....
I've also had big problems with Windows 2000Pro SP2 with SCSI contoller cards. Tried two upgrades to a SSCI40 card, and got BSOD after BSOD on startup. I finally gave up
One of my friends is the network admin for a very large payroll firm in Florida (can't remember the name). Their accounting package apparently has enough problems with large databases and indexing, etc to make the jump from a SCSI160 RAID array to a solid state drive very equitable.
I'll have to pass along the address to this thread Cheers,
Mark Broker
http://www.acc.umu.se/~sagge/scsi_ide/
There is no better choice for any application but rather a better choice per individual application.
There is no better choice for any application but rather a better choice per individual application.
Err SCSI-I was the *orginal* 1980s standard. SCSI-I was never available "wide", only 8 bit. In order to achieve 20MB/s you would have either SCSI-2 Wide or SCSI-2 Fast, which both are 20MB/s bus speeds. Ultra/133 isn't a standard, nor will it ever be. ATA/100 is the fastest "official speed" along with the final official ATA spec speed. But being as even the fastest ATA disk can only do about 45MB/s sustained squentail reads(with is synthetic only, not including cache bursts), it doesn't really make much difference. Ultra/133 can only aid slightly in cache bursts, and only one disk manufactor makes disks that use it.
As for speed, SCSI disks are currently available with faster rotational speeds, larger caches, and more capable interfaces. IBM, Seagate, Fujitisu, Quantum all make SCSI disk with rotational speeds of 15,000 RPM along with very large caches. The SCSI interface is also upto U320, not U160 anymore. SCSI disks are also available with sizes available(except for WD 200GB monster). SCSI host adaptors also support more devices per chain - 7 for narrow and 15 for wide(Technically 8/16 but the host adaptor will take on address). SCSI also allows for internal and external devices, along with scanner, networking adaptors, HDs, optical drives, anything you could want.
SCSI is by no means difficult to hook up. Yes, may have to read a paragraph or two if you've never done it before. All SCSI disks these days do SCAM, other then that you have to configure your ID on each device. For termination, you just need a LVD cable with a terminator at the end, no biggy. Almost all cards can do automatic termination for mixing internal/external devices. Most SCSI host adaptors will work any board support the PCI spec they are built on, some RAID controllers can be picky, but that is a different level.
It is true that most people don't need SCSI. The SerialATA is fine for most users. However, SCSI isn't intened for home users, its generally intended enterprise class users, hence the price and features.
As for performance, it really depends on your drives and controllers. And it depends on what your considering performance. There is many factors that come in to place when judging a drives "speed".
It all really depends on your needs, or how much of a geek you are. I personally have a QLogic Dual U160 PCI64/66 card with 1 9.1G R10k U160, 2 9.1G R7.2K U160, and 2 36G U10K U160 on the second channel. Maybe one day I'll get a nice U320 controller with a PCI-X bus(and a matching motherboard).
As for speed, SCSI disks are currently available with faster rotational speeds, larger caches, and more capable interfaces. IBM, Seagate, Fujitisu, Quantum all make SCSI disk with rotational speeds of 15,000 RPM along with very large caches. The SCSI interface is also upto U320, not U160 anymore. SCSI disks are also available with sizes available(except for WD 200GB monster). SCSI host adaptors also support more devices per chain - 7 for narrow and 15 for wide(Technically 8/16 but the host adaptor will take on address). SCSI also allows for internal and external devices, along with scanner, networking adaptors, HDs, optical drives, anything you could want.
SCSI is by no means difficult to hook up. Yes, may have to read a paragraph or two if you've never done it before. All SCSI disks these days do SCAM, other then that you have to configure your ID on each device. For termination, you just need a LVD cable with a terminator at the end, no biggy. Almost all cards can do automatic termination for mixing internal/external devices. Most SCSI host adaptors will work any board support the PCI spec they are built on, some RAID controllers can be picky, but that is a different level.
It is true that most people don't need SCSI. The SerialATA is fine for most users. However, SCSI isn't intened for home users, its generally intended enterprise class users, hence the price and features.
As for performance, it really depends on your drives and controllers. And it depends on what your considering performance. There is many factors that come in to place when judging a drives "speed".
It all really depends on your needs, or how much of a geek you are. I personally have a QLogic Dual U160 PCI64/66 card with 1 9.1G R10k U160, 2 9.1G R7.2K U160, and 2 36G U10K U160 on the second channel. Maybe one day I'll get a nice U320 controller with a PCI-X bus(and a matching motherboard).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.